1 / 10

A list of CERIF 2000 problems

A list of CERIF 2000 problems. Walter Niedermayer walter@derpi.tuwien.ac.at. Implementation. Full CERIF 2000 was not easy to implement some errors especially in the provided ORACLE database model toolkit correcting errors needs agreement about new field lengths and so on. ==> what to do?.

dorothyo
Download Presentation

A list of CERIF 2000 problems

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A list of CERIF 2000 problems Walter Niedermayer walter@derpi.tuwien.ac.at lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  2. Implementation • Full CERIF 2000 was not easy to implement • some errors especially in theprovided ORACLEdatabase model toolkit • correcting errors needs agreement about new field lengths and so on. • ==> what to do? lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  3. Marketing • CERIF 2000 is not yet widely known. • How can we organize support and training, feedback and evaluation? • When to publish a recommendation inan Official Journal of the EU? • Who should use CERIF 2000? • ==> what to do? lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  4. Documentation – Web Site • Site http://www.cordis.lu/cerif/ not maintained any more • One can get lost on this site. • An all-in-one CERIF 2000manual for download seems to be missing, sothe promotion of CERIF2000 is a difficult task. • ==> what to do? lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  5. Subject indexing • CERIF 2000 proposes to use the ORTELIUS thesaurus. • It is still unclear whether ORTELIUS will be extended for research information purposes and maintained for long term. • ==> what to do? • change the ORTELIUS thesaurus against that one usedin COS? lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  6. Data exchange • CERIF 2000 relational data model defines the data entities with their attributes and relationshipsas a good example for CRIS databases ("harmonization for easy data exchange"). • But which data exchange ("copy") is intended? • Some universities at least probably will not exchange data with others, theyare going to be in a new competition process. • ==> what to do? lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  7. Compliance with national bylaws • Which organization level should use CERIF2000 ? • Universities have strict bylaws to deliver research data to national ministries (different to CERIF 2000). • Especially the classes for publications are defined by the national bylaws differently from CERIF2000. • ==> what to do? • Compare the national evaluation bylaws? lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  8. User interface standard ? • It could be an important benefit of CERIF 2000 to have a proposed quality standard for the user interface (search forms). • Any other benefits are not really visible for a CRIS user (when he is querying only via the general web query interface) • ==> what to do? lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  9. Benefit and Vision • What is the greatest benefit of CERIF 2000? • To have "integrated" data into a future European network via a uniform query web interface (a new ERGO?)? • How we can make that visionunderstandable? • ==> what to do? lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

  10. Concluding Remarks • I find it very needed and useful to have a continued Help Desk for CERIF2000 • It is nice that EuroCRIS will take over the responsibility for the further developments of CERIF 2000 lEuroCRIS 31st October 2001

More Related